I understand. We need to make sure we build the new BLVD. to entice and handle large scale developments so we do get amazing developments on both sides of the street.

I hate the Boulevard design more than anyone else, but if you put enough people around it, and at least give the pedestrian a chance, (Long timed crosswalks, strict enforcement of people blocking the crosswalk while queuing, etc.) people will still walk, provided there are destinations on either side of it.

Plenty of examples around the world of very wide 4-6 lane streets working in an urban environment, where people still have good crossing ability. While not ideal, it can be done, and something of this scale would provide enough people on one side, where you can balance it out some.

People will not cross the street if there is nothing on the other side worth doing. That's just common sense.

I will clarify this statement some more.

The Boulevard as is currently designed would not be a barrier, only if we had several large developments such as this one (unlikely) on the south side, to balance the heavy weight of activity north of the Boulevard. Basically, you need enough "demand" on either side, to neutral out the negatives that the less walkable boulevard presents. Something of this scale, could overcome that deficit, for that area; specifically.

I hate the Boulevard design more than anyone else, but if you put enough people around it, and at least give the pedestrian a chance, (Long timed crosswalks, strict enforcement of people blocking the crosswalk while queuing, etc.) people will still walk, provided there are destinations on either side of it.

Plenty of examples around the world of very wide 4-6 lane streets working in an urban environment, where people still have good crossing ability. While not ideal, it can be done, and something of this scale would provide enough people on one side, where you can balance it out some.

People will not cross the street if there is nothing on the other side worth doing. That's just common sense.

Canal Street in New Orleans comes to mind. 6 lanes of traffic with massive sidewalks, retail on either side, and a big median with the streetcar running through it. Is it the most awesome urban street in the world? No, but it works pretty well.

Wide high speed streets are the exact same physical barrier to walking as a river, ravine, or cliff is. For example - from Western to Penn there are 14 spans across the Oklahoma River a pedestrian could use but only 10 ways across I-40 so in the instance I-40 is a BIGGER barrier than the river.

Wide high speed streets are the exact same physical barrier to walking as a river, ravine, or cliff is. For example - from Western to Penn there are 14 spans across the Oklahoma River a pedestrian could use but only 10 ways across I-40 so in the instance I-40 is a BIGGER barrier than the river.

Comparing a 45MPH at most BLVD to a 70 MPH Interstate Highway is about as disingenuous as it gets.

9 de Julio in Buenos Aires is about as wide from one side to the other as the Oklahoma River, might see more cars go through it in 2.4 hours than that section of I-40 sees in 24 hours, and has people all over the street.

Walkability is about a lot of things, but it ultimately boils down to 2 things: 1. Do I have somewhere to go (the most important thing) and 2. Do I have the infrastructure to get there efficiently by foot.

And despite the bent of many on this forum to be anti-all-things-vehicle, people need to get to a point where they can at least admit the possibility that high traffic roads play a part in place making, which is far and away the most important issue in development.

If NW Expressway had a reasonably sized median (10 feet), and all the buildings from Classen to Council were setback no more than 20-30 feet , it would be one of the most walkable streets in the city...

What amazes me the most is that even with this appearing to be fantasy and having no legs behind it, it doesn't detract from the development of OKC. There's so much going on throughout OKC that you don't really see this as a lost opportunity, but rather a sign of things to come.

Comparing a 45MPH at most BLVD to a 70 MPH Interstate Highway is about as disingenuous as it gets.

Do you know the % chance of death of being hit by a car going 45 mph vs. 70 mph? Answer - hardly any. At 45 mph the chance of death is 90%.

http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/enforcement/identifying_unsafe_behaviors.cfm

http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/enforcement/images/fatalities_chart.gif

Comparing a 45MPH at most BLVD to a 70 MPH Interstate Highway is about as disingenuous as it gets.

9 de Julio in Buenos Aires is about as wide from one side to the other as the Oklahoma River, might see more cars go through it in 2.4 hours than that section of I-40 sees in 24 hours, and has people all over the street.

Walkability is about a lot of things, but it ultimately boils down to 2 things: 1. Do I have somewhere to go (the most important thing) and 2. Do I have the infrastructure to get there efficiently by foot.

And despite the bent of many on this forum to be anti-all-things-vehicle, people need to get to a point where they can at least admit the possibility that high traffic roads play a part in place making, which is far and away the most important issue in development.

If NW Expressway had a reasonably sized median (10 feet), and all the buildings from Classen to Council were setback no more than 20-30 feet , it would be one of the most walkable streets in the city...

Agree 100%.

Do you know the % chance of death of being hit by a car going 45 mph vs. 70 mph? Answer - hardly any. At 45 mph the chance of death is 90%.

SRTS Guide: Identifying Unsafe Behaviors (http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/enforcement/identifying_unsafe_behaviors.cfm)

http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/enforcement/images/fatalities_chart.gif


That is true, but that is simply not a fair comparison when talking about walkability.

Your 45mph street will (hopefully) have on street parking, trees, and stop lights. A proper comparison would be number of pedestrians hit on a 45mph vs a 70 mph street. But, the data is skewed for that comparison because the only 70 mph streets are interstates with no sidewalks. And 45 mph streets have sidewalks (or should). So even that comparison's data would lead to a 70mph interstate being safer for pedestrians. (Due to the fact of their being very few pedestrian deaths along interstates)

There is just no comparing highways to arterial streets, and any and all data to compare the two is skewed. Apples and oranges.

Hold on - I wasn't comparing OKC Boulevard to I-40 - I compared I-40 walkability to the Oklahoma River walkability in my example. It is easier for a pedestrian to cross the Oklahoma River than it is I-40. Doesn't everyone agree with that? If not, maybe someone can explain how crossing I-40 is easier than crossing the Oklahoma River.

However, if we want to compare I-40 and OKC Blvd, all of the pedestrian crossing on I-40 are grade separated from I-40. Every crossing on OKC Blvd will be at-grade. Which is safer?

They are equally safe from a pedestrian-data stance since no cars go on or along the river, and no people walk on the interstate.

Comparing a 45MPH at most BLVD to a 70 MPH Interstate Highway is about as disingenuous as it gets.

9 de Julio in Buenos Aires is about as wide from one side to the other as the Oklahoma River, might see more cars go through it in 2.4 hours than that section of I-40 sees in 24 hours, and has people all over the street.

Walkability is about a lot of things, but it ultimately boils down to 2 things: 1. Do I have somewhere to go (the most important thing) and 2. Do I have the infrastructure to get there efficiently by foot.

And despite the bent of many on this forum to be anti-all-things-vehicle, people need to get to a point where they can at least admit the possibility that high traffic roads play a part in place making, which is far and away the most important issue in development.

If NW Expressway had a reasonably sized median (10 feet), and all the buildings from Classen to Council were setback no more than 20-30 feet , it would be one of the most walkable streets in the city...
This has to be one of the most reasonable well though out post regarding this issue I've seen. You said what I've been trying to say on here for a year now. Great post!

I don't think it is fair to try and make a comparison between Oklahoma City and Buenos Aires. Just because it works there doesn't mean it will work here. You're talking about totally different cultures and mindsets toward walking. What is the speed limit on Classen? There are plenty of places to walk to on Classen but do you ever see people doing that? I just have a hard time agreeing that people will be enticed to walk more just because you put the buildings closer to the road.

Do you know the % chance of death of being hit by a car going 45 mph vs. 70 mph? Answer - hardly any. At 45 mph the chance of death is 90%.

SRTS Guide: Identifying Unsafe Behaviors (http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/enforcement/identifying_unsafe_behaviors.cfm)

http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/enforcement/images/fatalities_chart.gif

tertiary point to the discussion at hand…Of course you're not going to survive a car hitting you at 45 MPH. Furthermore, I wasn't advocating for a 45 MPH road here…but that's the absolute most the road would be. (It will likely be 25 to 35)

There are no statistics for this, but common sense tells us that the percentage chance of getting hit on a road full of 70 MPH cars than that same road full of 45 MPH cars is obscenely higher…that's why there aren't sidewalks on interstates, and why trying to compare a boulevard to an Interstate is disingenuous. Of course I-40 is a barrier…but you can make no rational argument that comparing the Boulevard with I-40 is apples to oranges, let alone apples to apples. It's only a barrier if it's not well planned (see NW Expressway or Memorial).

I don't think it is fair to try and make a comparison between Oklahoma City and Buenos Aires. Just because it works there doesn't mean it will work here. You're talking about totally different cultures and mindsets toward walking. What is the speed limit on Classen? There are plenty of places to walk to on Classen but do you ever see people doing that? I just have a hard time agreeing that people will be enticed to walk more just because you put the buildings closer to the road.

I agree with you. But I would argue that, you have to have large densities on either side, to overcome the wide street.

To use your example, Classen: If the east side of Classen (we'll say for a block or two around 16th street) had several very large apartment complexes (Metropolitan, Edge, etc.) and the west side had a few large apartment complexes. And on either side, you had several bars, several restaurants, and several retail shops/commercial services. The demand to walk in the area would overcome the wide street. That wide street wouldn't matter, people would walk across.

As it is now, there's nothing to note on either side. And no reason to cross, or even walk on either side.

It's only a barrier if it's not well planned (see NW Expressway or Memorial).

I agree 100% but last I heard ODOT was planning for a 45 mph speed limit, on a road with a design speed of 60 mph. If anyone is going to build residential adjacent to the Blvd the speed limit is going to have to drop to 25 mph, and it will help if the road is designed to feel un-safe for driving above 25 mph.

I agree 100% but last I heard ODOT was planning for a 45 mph speed limit, on a road with a design speed of 60 mph.

I've kind of given up on this. Let them build it. When the old way of thinking retires, we'll have a large ROW to work with to install light rail down the middle (or streetcar), and get some bike lanes going.

I agree 100% but last I heard ODOT was planning for a 45 mph speed limit, on a road with a design speed of 60 mph. If anyone is going to build residential adjacent to the Blvd the speed limit is going to have to drop to 25 mph, and it will help if the road is designed to feel un-safe for driving above 25 mph.

If the Boulevard is a success, cars won't be able to travel 45 MPH even if that's the limit…It's not easy to get up to 45 MPH on NW Expressway during rush hour.

I'm going to bet 35MPH is the limit between Classen and it's Eastern terminus.

I don't think it is fair to try and make a comparison between Oklahoma City and Buenos Aires. Just because it works there doesn't mean it will work here. You're talking about totally different cultures and mindsets toward walking. What is the speed limit on Classen? There are plenty of places to walk to on Classen but do you ever see people doing that? I just have a hard time agreeing that people will be enticed to walk more just because you put the buildings closer to the road.

You don't see people doing it 1. Because there's not as much to go to as you think and you missed point 2. There's not the infrastructure to walk EFFICIENTLY. The people who walk Classen do so because they have no other choice, or they're just bored.

I agree 100% but last I heard ODOT was planning for a 45 mph speed limit, on a road with a design speed of 60 mph. If anyone is going to build residential adjacent to the Blvd the speed limit is going to have to drop to 25 mph, and it will help if the road is designed to feel un-safe for driving above 25 mph.
I've kind of given up on this. Let them build it. When the old way of thinking retires, we'll have a large ROW to work with to install light rail down the middle (or streetcar), and get some bike lanes going.

You know - the 'give up and do it right later' strategy sounds better all the time.

You know - the 'give up and do it right later' strategy sounds better all the time.

If current leadership is going to be so stubborn about walk ability, let them have their ball. My generation will just have to fix it later, which is a shame, but seems to be the only way on certain issues.

If current leadership is going to be so stubborn about walk ability, let them have their ball. My generation will just have to fix it later, which is a shame, but seems to be the only way on certain issues.

The only problem with that is that without a good example, who will know what they're missing? How much longer before OKC leadership gets it if everybody is still happy with crappy? If we could get that right, then maybe the other dominoes will start to fall. Reminds me of one of my favorite "Far Side" cartoons, with a flock of ducks walking. One of them is pointing up to a flock in the sky and says, "Hey! Look at what they're doing!"

It's been my theory for a long time that citizens in OKC haven't demanded better in part because they are generally not well-traveled. And for many peopl travel from OKC often means Dallas or other regional destinations that have historically had low placemaking standards. The best cure for "better than crappy makes us happy" is exposure to great places.

It's been my theory for a long time that citizens in OKC haven't demanded better in part because they are generally not well-traveled. And for many peopl travel from OKC often means Dallas or other regional destinations that have historically had low placemaking standards. The best cure for "better than crappy makes us happy" is exposure to great places.

Like Michigan Ave in Chicago maybe? It is 6-7 lanes wide and it merges with Lake Shore Dr in a manner similar to the east Boulevard and I40 interchange. Traffic moves at a fairly brisk pace. Yet thousands of people cross it every day - why? Because there are reasons to do so.

OKC has a classic chicken and egg question with this boulevard - are reasons to cross needed before providing the means to cross, or are the means to cross needed before anything will be built to become a reason to cross? The final design will determine this and so far OKC seems to be dead set on making this question irrelevant by making the boulevard a through street.

IF the "dual boulevard" design was adopted, 3rd Street could be designed to function very similar to Michigan Ave - same type access from a higher speed road at one end, and ending as part of the street grid. The MAPS3 Park would be positioned similar to Millennium and Grant Park. Of course anything resembling Chicago is decades away, but the layout could encourage similar development on a smaller scale if the boulevard is designed to facilitate it.

I'd say it's pretty proven here that walkability doesn't mean crap if you don't have the place to walk.

Back to the subject of the Lumber Yard...

I've heard from a couple of good sources this property is most definitely under contract.

Not sure about the buyer yet or the development plans. At present, they are conducting due diligence (soil tests, etc.)

Back to the subject of the Lumber Yard...

I've heard from a couple of good sources this property is most definitely under contract.

Not sure about the buyer yet or the development plans. At present, they are conducting due diligence (soil tests, etc.)

Do you have any reason to believe this tower project is in any way, being planned? Or has this been ruled out?

An architect in Dallas doesn't just pick a very specific property (clearly the exact property boundaries of the Lumber Yard) and develop detailed renderings.

It might be just a wild concept but I suspect it is tied to the new owners who are trying to generate interest in a potential development.

Can't be a complete coincidence that this property is under contract right as the renderings are posted.

Pete, so do you think the renderings in the photograph are still a possibility?

So, you're saying their is a chance??? :)

Of course there's a chance. Early bird gets the worm on this. We need a high rise condo tower. Smart money will be first. There are almost a dozen of these in Austin and even more in Dallas and Houston. OKC is a growing, dynamic city with a booming economy. Why should we be surprised by development concepts like this?

If your intention is to build a "large" tower w/ condos, you would use this method. If it is a "spec", then you want to get started on the marketing side of "selling / pre-leasing" those units ASAP. ...there may be more substance here than you might think.

This is exactly what I was saying. If there was a rendering of the COOP Mill area, trying to drum up interest in that property, then ok.

But, this piece is specific w/ the Lumber yard and the arch firm Humphreys is listing this as a "project w/ a specific site". This property being under-contract, like Pete said, gives me more reason to believe this IS moving forward. ...money IS changing hands and with a nice arch firm too. I'm more in the 80% this is real.

( this developer is already doing things "Correctly" with the needs of the city ) ...this will be the first to hit the High End Residential Tower in OKC, a huge advantage.

Like Michigan Ave in Chicago maybe? It is 6-7 lanes wide and it merges with Lake Shore Dr in a manner similar to the east Boulevard and I40 interchange. Traffic moves at a fairly brisk pace. Yet thousands of people cross it every day - why? Because there are reasons to do so.

OKC has a classic chicken and egg question with this boulevard - are reasons to cross needed before providing the means to cross, or are the means to cross needed before anything will be built to become a reason to cross? The final design will determine this and so far OKC seems to be dead set on making this question irrelevant by making the boulevard a through street.

IF the "dual boulevard" design was adopted, 3rd Street could be designed to function very similar to Michigan Ave - same type access from a higher speed road at one end, and ending as part of the street grid. The MAPS3 Park would be positioned similar to Millennium and Grant Park. Of course anything resembling Chicago is decades away, but the layout could encourage similar development on a smaller scale if the boulevard is designed to facilitate it.

Michigan also has VERY wide sidewalks and contiguous development. And while a lot people do cross it, it is one of the worst streets in Chicago to walk down and cross. I do think they have done everything possible to mitigate it with landscaping, wide sidewalks, and pedestrian friendly light timeing. The thing is, I don't think we have the same mentality here right now and as another poster stated the next generation will probably have to "fix it" by doing what Michigan has done. It's taken every bit of energy of local interests to keep it from being a elevated freeway most of the way and that may still happen. Basically, as I understand it, it would take even more redesign for the boulevard to function as Michigan avenue does.

This VVV


^^^
This

This makes sense. With every Thunder home game, their property will be one of the top 3 displayed everytime. The Peake , The Devon Bldg, and The Towers on the Blvd.

...this is easy money. 43 stories and people will want it bad! Very nice project.

...another positive note, is this project was hidden until after the election...? This is not just a property owner trying to increase the value of their RE, but a developer that "might be" moving forward because the city just voted to "keep it going" w/ Mr. Cornett.

Are you serious? Are you 15? Are you Thunder?

News 9 just did a story on this. They butchered it. Said it was south of the new crosstown and they put it on a level of measurement with Devon Tower mentioning that this would be only 7 stories shorter (while probably not realizing that the general public has no clue that residential floor heights are shorter). I was surprised they didn't mention anything about "Bricktown, Canada". Whichever...they did say for now it's a dream that "could" one day turn into reality, so they obviously got all their information from here.

News 9 just did a story on this. They butchered it. Said it was south of the new crosstown and they put it on a level of measurement with Devon Tower mentioning that this would be only 7 stories shorter (while probably not realizing that the general public has no clue that residential floor heights are shorter). I was surprised they didn't mention anything about "Bricktown, Canada". Whichever...they did say for now it's a dream that "could" one day turn into reality, so they obviously got all their information from here.

I wonder if the local stations should continue using OKCTalk as a source to report on new development? Much of this site is speculation about upcoming developments that are likely but have not been officially announced and are not set in stone. It's not unusual for something talked about here for pages and pages to end up changing significantly or getting the axe. When the Oklahoman reports something, we know its a done deal.

When the Oklahoman reports something, we know its a done deal.

Lackmeyer's heart just fluttered and warmed.

they didn't mention anything about "Bricktown, Canada".

I have seen this mentioned several times on here but when I looked at the site yesterday morning it said Bricktown, Oklahoma. Unless you are seeing that in a different place than I am.

I have seen this mentioned several times on here but when I looked at the site yesterday morning it said Bricktown, Oklahoma. Unless you are seeing that in a different place than I am.

I just looked, and it has been changed to Oklahoma. A couple of days ago it said Canada, which means someone actively changed the page recently.

An architect in Dallas doesn't just pick a very specific property (clearly the exact property boundaries of the Lumber Yard) and develop detailed renderings.

It might be just a wild concept but I suspect it is tied to the new owners who are trying to generate interest in a potential development.

Can't be a complete coincidence that this property is under contract right as the renderings are posted.

...and Pete, the arch website listed their "stock" projects as : On the Board. All the other projects listed were with a specific site.

The developer here certainly has "intentions" of moving this forward. If he has deep pockets and if this is not his first "tower" project, then this might just happen.

Being first to build a High-End Residential Tower, will give them a big advantage.

I just looked, and it has been changed to Oklahoma. A couple of days ago it said Canada, which means someone actively changed the page recently.

It was changed to Oklahoma the day that this came about. It said Canada all day and then that evening when I checked it said Oklahoma.

...It might be just a wild concept but I suspect it is tied to the new owners who are trying to generate interest in a potential development.

Can't be a complete coincidence that this property is under contract right as the renderings are posted.

This certainly seems possible. Like I said there are few people who would like to see this development more than me. I hope my info is wrong.

Also, we know that the developer is from "out of state", because he is not affraid of Height ! 43 Stories.

Expect "Gary T" to make this the first question at 10am for the business chat.

...another positive note, is this project was hidden until after the election...? This is not just a property owner trying to increase the value of their RE, but a developer that "might be" moving forward because the city just voted to "keep it going" w/ Mr. Cornett.

Point taken, I wonder how many more suburban tract house bldg permits were filed instantly after Cornett won?

This certainly seems possible. Like I said there are few people who would like to see this development more than me. I hope my info is wrong.

Not saying your info. is wrong... I've said all the way along this is probably just a conceptual plan.

But it's a very specific conceptual plan for a property that is about to be sold.

Point taken, I wonder how many more suburban tract house bldg permits were filed instantly after Cornett won?

I'm sure the larger production builders were happy to see Mr. Cornett for another term.

This developer is looking at the same things too. ..he probably just needs a Blvd completed so the "to be" tenants can get to their condo's ?

They don't need to wait on the boulevard. It will be completed long before they get this thing built (if it's going to get built).

My guess is that this is a proposal to get financing. Whatever actually gets built may be different, but this is the big pretty picture to show off. Just have to see if the money men are likewise impressed.

I'm sure the larger production builders were happy to see Mr. Cornett for another term.

This developer is looking at the same things too. ..he probably just needs a Blvd completed so the "to be" tenants can get to their condo's ?

They just need any boulevard, right? Some surface to carry those cars belonging to condo owners!

Nick beat him :)

They just need any boulevard, right? Some surface to carry those cars belonging to condo owners!

In one thread you are calling for well designed boulevard adhering to urban design principles and in another you are demeaning someone for not liking the Stage Center because it doesn't follow those principles. His standards are too "rigid." I don't get it. Am I missing something to the New Urbanism debate?

They don't need to wait on the boulevard. It will be completed long before they get this thing built (if it's going to get built).

My guess is that this is a proposal to get financing. Whatever actually gets built may be different, but this is the big pretty picture to show off. Just have to see if the money men are likewise impressed.

I hope the "money men" are from Texas. They typically don't have heartburn when you build something over 5 stories and not made of lumber.

From the live chat:


10:00
Comment From Nick Emenhiser
Hey Steve, is the Lumber Yard project newly rendered by a Dallas architecture firm on the site newly acquired by OKC Mid Rise LLC, in any way connected to the development you've been attracted that would purportedly make Dallas and Kansas City "jealous." Apologies if this question gets asked 60 times before and after I have gotten this in.

10:05
Steve Lackmeyer: No. Be careful about reading too much into renderings discovered on architects' websites. Based on what I know, and folks I've talked to, I will be very, very surprised if this rendering represents anything real. I have not seen any transactions involving the sale of the lumberyard or anything transactions involving an entity named OKC Mid Rise LLC. There are some really great rumors that get batted around on a local website. Some are real, some are not real. This one, I suspect, is not real. And folks in the know say it is not real.

Expect "Gary T" to make this the first question at 10am for the business chat.

Sorry, I was in meetings all morning...

Just heard from another trusted source that this property is most definitely under contract to an out-of-state purchaser who contracted with the Dallas architects to come up with a concept.

Doesn't mean this will get built as depicted, but this all isn't just rumor. The site is under contract to a group that has a lot of resources and wants to build residential with some retail along the boulevard.

The transaction hasn't closed but they have come to terms and the potential buyers are in the process of performing due diligence.

Just heard from another trusted source that this property is most definitely under contract to an out-of-state purchaser who contracted with the Dallas architects to come up with a concept.

Doesn't mean this will get built as depicted, but this all isn't just rumor. The site is under contract to a group that has a lot of resources and wants to build residential with some retail along the boulevard.

The transaction hasn't closed but they have come to terms and the potential buyers are in the process of performing due diligence.

OKC Mid Rise?

I'm not exactly sure of the purchaser.